Are old hunting semi-auto hunting rifles being affect by proposed ban?

So I still have my granfathers rifles. Have not been able to go to the range yet or get a staight answer from my Mother on if I can just buy them both from Grams myself. She only wants me to keep one... grrr...

Now they are 22 caliber semi automatics. I just wonder if they are affected by the proposed ban? If so it might be just the right loop hole to get mom to let me keep them in the family... wink wink

Mossberg 151K (1950-1951)
Remington 550-1 (Feb. 1960)

So do you think hey will be affected?

The one newer semi auto rifle I do want will be affected and cant be found locally...
beretta cx4 storm in a 40 caliber.
I see a trip to the gun show or buying one off gunbroker. Im betting the gunshows are going to be outrageous and I just hate buying like that in an auction. Hard to blindly send that kind of money to someone and trust you will get said item!

Scorch, I've heard that the proposed bill is already finished and as of yesterday it was announced that it'll pretty much just be the clinton ban with all the fixins all over again plus some extra stuff to make it sound like it will really work this time.

your guns will be fine RedRaif, the magazines are non detachable so they will not be affected. the CX4 will be ban compliant with nothing more than a 10 round magazine. buying some of the higher capacity magazines may be easier than the guns themselves so I would buy a couple mags now and then after all the hubbub dies down things start to come back in stock for decent prices buy the gun.

__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.

As Art says, wait until something concrete is proposed and follow that.

As for "Will this be banned"? questions, no one knows and there are slip ups made.

As example, the New York law apparently doesn't take effect until March.
Today they discovered that unless they change the new law, when it takes effect it will be a crime for New York law enforcement on all levels to possess any magazines over 7 rounds.

Since all New York state and city cops carry at least 15 round mags, this constitutes one of those "Oops" things the fools failed to consider in the rush to look proactive.

There are some inconsiderate people asking questions in New York like:
"Why should a retired cop be allowed to have 15 round magazines? He's not a working cop any more and doesn't need them for self defense any more then "civilians" do.".

And:
"If 7 rounds is enough for a citizen, why do the police need 15 rounds. If they're afraid of being out-gunned by criminals, what am I? Chopped liver"?

As I understand the proposed federal law, it would ban internal, non detachable magazines holding over 10 rounds except for .22's with tubular magazines. It would also ban semi-automatic shotguns and pump rifles and shotguns. An early report said it would also include lever action rifles, but that appears to have been dropped. The NY law apparently includes all of the above but sets a 7 round limit, with the explicit purpose of banning the M1 rifle, SKS, and Johnson, as well as dozens of rifles "capable of taking" a magazine over 7 rounds, and those magazines.

There was also talk in MD of including a handgun ban and just ignoring any state or federal court decision that went against them. Courts depend on the executive branch to enforce their decisions. At this time, it is possible that neither the president nor some governors would obey any pro-gun court order and no one would have the power to do anything about it.

Upholding the Constitution ultimately depends on the good faith of the executive who controls the police and armed services. If the executive acts in bad faith and chooses not to enforce the laws or court orders, or not to obey the constitution, there is nothing anyone can do, certainly not a disarmed populace.

The President and Congress both derive their authority from the Constitution, not the other way around, no matter what they think. The Constitution derives its authority from The People, despite statements to the contrary from Washington, DC. The 9th and 10th Amendments clearly state that any right not assigned is retained by The People, but we would be asking the usurpers to agree that they have no right to regulate arms.

oneoldsap, if you actually read what Obama suggested--not ordered, actually--it puts everything meaningful to Congress, which means "our" House of Representatives must approve the various idiotic bills which are being submitted. Not much likelihood of that.

__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!

Also, don't start freaking out when a bill is introduced with absurd restriction and ten co-sponsors. There are a couple ridiculous ban bill introduced every session that never make it out of committee.

When something that seems almost moderate with 50 or 100 co-sponsors is announced start calling and writing like crazy.

Also, don't start freaking out when a bill is introduced with absurd restriction and ten co-sponsors. There are a couple ridiculous ban bill introduced every session that never make it out of committee.

The New York and California legislatures have agendas which are totally unrelated to reality and "public input" is meaningless. Nothing we can do to affect them. But we can affect the US House of Representatives.

__________________
You're from BATFE? Come right in! I use all your fine products!

Well we had somewhere between 200 and 250 people show up at the statehouse yesterday . I didn't think that was a very good turnout , for such serious business . Then I read today that only a couple of hundred showed in Raleigh NC , which makes our turnout look pretty good here in VT . Folks need to get much more serious about defending the 2nd Ammendent ! I implore all of you / us to get involved in some way , shape or form !

Also, don't start freaking out when a bill is introduced with absurd restriction and ten co-sponsors. There are a couple ridiculous ban bill introduced every session that never make it out of committee.

First , registration (so they know where they are) , then confiscation ! There was a bill proposed in Vermont ( S-32 ) , that couldn't even garner a co sponsor ! It's History today . Conservatives believe what they see , Liberals see what they believe !

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.